Talk:Main Page

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Errors with "In the news"

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Errors in "On this day"

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Request for comment on adding this week's article for improvement to the main page has an RfC

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Request for comment on adding this week's article for improvement to the main page has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. InfernoHues (talk) 05:35, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

More featured articles including a double redirect

'More featured articles' in the TFA section currently links to Wikipedia:Featured articles (linked from TFAfooter), which redirects to the correct location. I don't see why this is necessary, considering literally every other link in TFA doesn't do anything like this. Instead of directly linking it to it's desired location avoiding the double redirect, we could change every other link to do the same thing if you wish. In solidarity, FantasticWikiUser_{(Ts and Cs)} 14:02, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I see it was used for stats. Ignore this section then. In solidarity, FantasticWikiUser_{(Ts and Cs)} 14:03, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

@Dan Leonard: is this redirect intended to remain here indefinitely? Was there some discussion about this? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:45, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I believe this was a statistical redirect, used to measure how many people learn about the FA process by clicking through from the main page. There are a handful of others at , most notably Wikipedia:Featured articles* (note the asterisk), which is linked to from the FA topicon on all featured articles. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 14:22, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

It's a single redirect, not a double redirect. So there is nothing broken here, but it does seem a bit odd to do this — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:46, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I found the discussion at Template talk:TFAfooter#Protected edit request on 4 June 2025 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:51, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

ER

The comma placement causes issues with some scripts, see for example https://i.imgur.com/SrNt88x.png.

FaviFake (talk) 12:09, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

But then it would be grammatically wrong. The image you link to means nothing. You need to explain what you mean by "comma placement causes issues with some scripts". Bazza 7 (talk) 12:22, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

But then it would be grammatically wrong.
No it wouldn't? Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia that anyone can edit" is grammatically correct.
The image you link to means nothing
It's an example.
You need to explain what you mean by "comma placement causes issues with some scripts". [/wiki/User:Bazza_7]
As you can see, the [ copy ] button appears incorrectly between the comma and the rest of the heading. FaviFake (talk) 12:25, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

@FaviFake: My bad. I didn't notice the comma lurking inside the heading tags on your proposed version.

I still do not understand your image. The link you supplied returns an image of a purple rectangle with "Content not viewable in your region". Is this what you see; or are you using an image repository which refuses requests from where I am located (UK)?

What "[copy]" button are you referring to? Bazza 7 (talk) 12:59, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I can see the image, it shows "Welcome to Wikipedia [copy]," Cerebral726 (talk) 13:05, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

@Cerebral726, @FaviFake: Thanks. I think I understand this now. There is no "[copy]", hidden or otherwise, in the heading I get sent from Wikipedia:

<div id="mp-welcome"><h1 class="html-heading mw-html-heading" id="Welcome_to_Wikipedia">Welcome to <a rel="mw:WikiLink" href="//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia" title="Wikipedia" id="mwBg">Wikipedia</a></h1>,</div> :::::<div id="mp-free">the <a rel="mw:WikiLink" href="//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_content" title="Free content" id="mwBw">free</a> encyclopedia...

Are you both running some sort of script which is adding this to the page? If yes, then I think that script is where any amendments should be made, not the unadulterated information as served. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:20, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

But isn't that comma part of the heading, which that tag seems to be marking? It'd make sense for it to be included. Cerebral726 (talk) 13:22, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Exactly. It is itself part of the heading. FaviFake (talk) 13:23, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I disagree. If the comma's part of the heading, so too should be the text following it.

But this is by-the-by. Your reasoning was to stop a problem with a script (as yet undisclosed) which places a button on the page. If it's not working because a comma is in the wrong place, then it needs fixing to make it work using something other than a crude screen-scrape. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

No. If it's not working because a comma is in the wrong place, then the comma should be moved to the right place. I suspect this also has implications for users of screen readers, which rely on the HTML output rather then the displayed text. FaviFake (talk) 13:32, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

If the comma is part of the header, so too is the subheader? That seems clearly wrong. The tags are delineating the Welcome to Wikipedia line, then there is a break, and then there is the "the free encyclopedia etc." The comma is obviously part of the first line. If it is causing an issue with FaviFakes script, it's not unreasonable to guess it could cause issues with another of the multitude of valid reasons people use scripts. Cerebral726 (talk) 13:51, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm using the Imgur file hosting service; I was unaware of the fact that it was unavailable in the UK. FaviFake (talk) 13:18, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

World Cup OTD blurbs

Moved from WP:ERRORS

Yesterday's OTD had a blurb about West Germany winning the 1974 World Cup final. Today's OTD has a blurb about West Germany winning the 1990 World Cup final. Tomorrow's OTD has a blurb about Italy winning the 2006 World Cup final. On Sat July 11 there are blurbs about Italy winning the 1982 World Cup final and Spain winning the 2010 World Cup final. On 12 July OTD has France winning the 1998 World Cup final, and on 16 July there's Uruguay winning the 1950 final. July 17 has Brazil winning in 1994.

That's far too many blurbs on the same topic in quick succession. I know the World Cup is culturally important, but eight blurbs in 11 days is ridiculous. It's too late to do anything about today, but could some/all of the subsequent items be swapped out for other blurbs? Modest Genius ^talk 14:07, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Someone changed the hook in the Susie Pop DYK entry

Hi, I don't know how to change this, but the approved hook for Susie Pop was supposed to be

ALT1: ...that a fixture of Madrid nightlife in the 1990s was a trans girl who was often seen at concerts wearing a large picture hat?

Someone has changed this to:

...that a fixture of Madrid nightlife in the 1990s was a guitarrist who was often seen at concerts wearing a large picture hat?

I don't know where to change this. Please help.... Slava570 (talk) 13:08, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

• Slava570 I've fixed this. See WP:ERRORS (which is the right place if you need to discuss a main page issue in future). Black Kite (talk) 13:41, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you! I appreciate that. The change from girl to woman is okay with me btw... Slava570 (talk) 13:50, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

  @Black Kite: why have you reinserted the text about her being a "trans woman"? That was removed and changed because of MOS:GENDERID, we should not be explicitly flagging the trans or otherwise status of an individual when that is not the most noteworthy thing about her. The article defines her as a guitarist, hence it was changed to that. Please self-revert. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:06, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

  Amakuru, I read this section, and all I see is Use the name and gendered words (man, woman, person) that reflect the person's most recent expressed self-identification. I don't see any prohibition there against saying someone's gender. Also, Susie Pop is definitely more notable for being trans than for being a guitarist. In fact, I will take another look at the article later, because guitarist probably shouldn't be the first thing to appear. She was mainly a vocalist and according to the sources, she only used the guitar onstage, but didn't really know how to play it. It was part of the band's campy style. Slava570 (talk) 14:14, 9 July 2026 (UTC)